There are many reasons to think Ron Paul is a bottom feeder. He refuses to support a Constitutional amendment to protect normal, heterosexual marriage. He voted to turn the United States military into a San Francisco bath house by repealing DADT. He wants to see drugs and prostitution legalized. He thinks Islamo-Nazi Iran should have a nuclear weapon. He surrounds himself with lunatics like Cindy Sheehan's love slave, Screwy Lewy Rockwell. In general, there isn't a sewer RuPaul (H/T: Mark Levin) isn't too proud to hunt for food in.

Then, there's this. From CBS News:

***********************************

"Libertarian Congressman Ron Paul is breaking with many of his fellow Republicans - among them his son Rand - to support the creation of the planned Islamic cultural center near the former site of the World Trade Center that has come to be known as the 'ground zero mosque.'

In a statement decrying 'demagogy' around the issue, the former Republican presidential candidate wrote late last week that "the debate should have provided the conservative defenders of property rights with a perfect example of how the right to own property also protects the 1st Amendment rights of assembly and religion by supporting the building of the mosque.'

'Instead, we hear lip service given to the property rights position while demanding that the need to be 'sensitive' requires an all-out assault on the building of a mosque, several blocks from 'ground zero,' Paul continues.

He goes on to argue that 'the neo-conservatives' who demand continual war in the Middle East and Central Asia...never miss a chance to use hatred toward Muslims to rally support for the ill conceived preventative wars."

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20014453-503544.html

************************************

Yes, I know this is old news. No, I'm not breaking any new ground here. However, since Ol' Ru is running for President, this crap should be revisited. (Even Howard "YEAAAAAAAAH!" Dean thought this was a bad idea.)

I don't want to get involved in the technical legalities about whether or not this House of Hatred should or should not be built, since the developers don't seem to have the money for Lincoln Logs, let alone building a gazillion dollar insult. That was beaten to death last year and I don't feel like rehashing it. What I want to focus on is RuPaul's detestable attitude on the matter. (Which is eerirly similiar to Chariman Obama's and Nazi Pelosi's detestable attitude on the matter.)

The above snippet shows, once again, that RuPaul is NOT a Conservative, regardless of what his drug addict followers claim. He's basically an anarchist, and this little episode proves it.

Now, before we get started, I think it's appropriate to explain what I mean by anarchist. I'm not talking in this sense of a bomb-thowing V For Vendetta type. I'm talking about someone who believes they have the right to do what they please when they feel like doing it. That's what RuPaul is advocating here. This has nothing to do with "neo-conservative" war mongering or the religious rights of Muslims. (This is a bare-bones explanation of RuPaul's mentor Murray Rothbard's anarcho-capitalism, which basically states that society should allow individuals to do as they please as long as they can afford to do so.)

A Conservative doesn't believe in any of the above nonsense. A Conservative is a staunch defender of the individual and his rights, but the Conservative also believes in common sense and morality. For example, a Conservative would defend a bar owner's right to allow smoking in his bar, but a Conservative would fight tooth and nail to stop a strip club from opening next to an elementary school or a church. The Conservative fights for limited government, but never for anarchy. The Conservative also believes that while the individual has rights and those rights should be defended at all costs, the individual should use those rights in a responsible manner. In other words, the Conserative may very well want to give the social finger to the driver of a Smart Car with a "Obama 2012" bumper sticker, but he doesn't because he believes in a polite moral society.

Ladies and gentlemen, yes there's a fine line that often gets blurred when it comes to our rights, and I don't claim to have all the answers. But I will tell you this, I sure do understand our rights better than Ron Paul does.

OWK was very subtle about it.
He liked to imply that everyone on the thread was homo.
If questioned about it he got really defensive.
Sadly, his post history doesn’t let you go past February 2004.
He and I scrapped a couple times.

I don't care a whit about the homos. I have better things to do than fret about gay people.

So homos in the military is fine with you, homos marrying each other is fine with you, homos adopting or fostering children is fine with you. And mandatory "sensitivity" training, discrimination and punishment for people not toeing the pro-homo agenda line, all fine and dandy. Oh, is pro-homo sex ed in public school okay too, K-12?

303
posted on 12/07/2011 11:40:41 AM PST
by little jeremiah
(We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)

I find Absolutely Nobama’s presence on FR a wonderful fresh breeze of truth and no holds barred fighting spirit, which is exactly what is needed to try to turn this country around.

It’s not just Ronulans and their leader, since RPaul will never win and knows it. It’s the lies and crap that RPaul and his faithful handful believe the spew that need to be soundly defeated. And to top it all off, it’s good clean fun!

304
posted on 12/07/2011 11:45:53 AM PST
by little jeremiah
(We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)

Well, Ron Paul supports homos. And if you support Ron Paul, well. You then are supporting the homo agenda. He is no conservative, not even close. Try again, you fail. F- on your grade. But at least hed support your screen name.

What's with all the line breaks? Is this supposed to be poetry? It reminds me of a high school kid posting on Facebook.

Your words, not mine. Politically, I’m far more concerned about the encroaching power of the state and the solidification of crony capitalism than I am with any homosexual agenda-type topics. I understand and respect your position on and interest in this area, but I’m just not going to engage you about it. It does not interest me at all.

So homos in the military is fine with you, homos marrying each other is fine with you, homos adopting or fostering children is fine with you. And mandatory "sensitivity" training, discrimination and punishment for people not toeing the pro-homo agenda line, all fine and dandy.

It's not that people support these things necessarily. It's just that normal people have better things to worry about than who's F'ing whom.

I, for one would rather concern myself with getting as many chicks as possible than having gay dudes on my mind 24/7. Priorities.

Really?
I dare you to look up The Folsom Street Fair.
It’s not in the closet, it’s in public.
They even had fetish gear for toddlers at the last several ‘episodes’.
I’m sorry you fail to understand what their aim is and what is at stake.

When he got the same treatment he says this: "Please, Dear God, tell me you're still in your teens."

I was talking about the reasoning skills you displayed in that post, you knucklehead. Not very developed, those. So I figured you were still in your teens, and maybe still a bit uneducated. You're proving me right with every post. Surprise me and post something intelligent.

Post 271 shows lack of ideas, lack of subject, lack of anything useful to make it worth posting, yet you did.Shall we discuss that instead?You came into this thread with nothing to say, nothing to add, and have proven useless to any honest discussion.Sorry if that ooffends you some.Try having something worth saying next time.

It's not that people support these things necessarily. It's just that normal people have better things to worry about than who's F'ing whom.

I, for one would rather concern myself with getting as many chicks as possible than having gay dudes on my mind 24/7. Priorities.

At this point no one who visits FR can pretend ignorance about the whole scope of the homo agenda as you play at. If the fags kept their disgusting habits and practices private, no one would know or care. Except, of course, the large numbers of children and adolescents they molest... But the large point is that the huge federal government and many states have been very busy forcing the agenda on the entire population in schools, now the military for God's sake - this seems to mean nothing to you - in industry, local, state and fedov at all levels force hirelings to approve of, tolerate, learn about every thing "gay" and any dissenting opinions or views are verboten. And much, much more.

I figure you're lying when you claim that the fag agenda does not affect you; the only rational conclusion is that you like it. And one of the favorite fag agenda promoters dirty tactics is one you use - to accuse those opposed to the fag agenda of being perverts themselves, which you are clearly insinuating. The only reason you do this is to shut me up.

I will never shut up.

321
posted on 12/07/2011 1:12:05 PM PST
by little jeremiah
(We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)

Politically, Im far more concerned about the encroaching power of the state and the solidification of crony capitalism than I am with any homosexual agenda-type topics. I understand and respect your position on and interest in this area, but Im just not going to engage you about it. It does not interest me at all.

It doesn't interest you means that it doesn't matter, or iow you don't see it as anything to trouble yourself about, no big deal. Homosexuals in the military - no big deal, etc. In other words, the current status quo of homosexual this and that forced on kids in schools, in the military, and so on is okay with you.

And your claim of being concerned about "the encroaching power of the state" is selective, since it is only the "encroaching power of the state" that is advancing the homo agenda on us all. So THAT aspect of "encroaching power of the state" you're fine with.

322
posted on 12/07/2011 1:17:20 PM PST
by little jeremiah
(We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)

Back during my first stint in the uniform, beginning in 1996 just after “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” was signed by Bill Clinton, the homosexuals joined in droves because they thought our military would be an all you could eat meat market.
They didn’t figure that “Don’t ask don’t tell” meant “We’re not going to ask and you STFU about it”.
Well, enter one promising youth straight from indoctrination.
We called him “Bannanasack”, he was a doe eyed creep who couldn’t take “No” for an answer.
He’d jump into the shower with you.
After getting his face pounded to a pulp numerous times, he still didn’t learn.
However, our cadre had this to say about it, “He sure does fall down alot.”

I detest homosexuals for their behavior, and for their lack of respect for others.
I have not met one yet that understood that “No” meant NO instead of “Grab me again in a few minutes”.

Allowing them to serve openly only opens the door for worse.
And homosexuals pretty much one and all are emotionally unstable.
Just the kind of person you want sitting next to you under battlefield stress, right jmc813?

Darks, a goodly number of freepers have written on FR about their experiences with homosexuals in the military, and some to me via freepmail. Each and every experience was parallel with yours - BAD. Some even worse. The only ones who’ve said they had no problem with homosexuals in the military were ones who oddly enough also had no problem with the homo agenda or said “what agenda?”, and also were not conservative in their other viewpoints. On in particular was Drew68, who was banned, but then I saw him again later, so I don’t know his status. But he used to post on some leftist scum site and sneer at FR and freepers.

324
posted on 12/07/2011 2:41:36 PM PST
by little jeremiah
(We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)

The idiots who see nothing wrong with homos in the military also see nothing wrong with the Folsom Street Fair OR the toddler fetish gear they have there.
Not surprisingly, they don’t admit that, usually.

Couple years back there was a thread about Disney “Gay Day”.
Well, there were pictures of these people and it looked like Night of the Living Dead.
There were reports from parents who had to fight off the ‘gays’ because the homos were trying to drag children off into the restrooms.
The MSM was silent on this, of course.
If memory serves, the homo apologists were not present on that thread.
Or they kept it down.

Trolls are by definition dishonest. If they weren’t duplicitous and deceitful, they’d get zotted a lot more often. I think they’re getting too many “stop it or else”s. They stop on one thread, and start up on another.

328
posted on 12/07/2011 5:58:05 PM PST
by little jeremiah
(We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)

To be honest, I don't think I've ever read a Hemmingway book that I can remember. (Maybe in school) If it isn't political non-fiction, 1984, Animal Farm, Atlas Shrugged, or Anthem, I simply don't care. I guess I'm just a Right Wing zealot. (Chuckle)

330
posted on 12/07/2011 6:40:36 PM PST
by Absolutely Nobama
(Chairman Obama And Ron Paul Are Sure Signs The Republic Is In Serious Trouble. God Help Us All.)

I don’t read fiction; life’s too short and way too interesting and I just don’t have time. I do have a set of Dickens in case I want fiction. Although I did read Matt Bracken’s trilogy which I highly recommend if you haven’t read it.

Have you read it, Darksheare?

331
posted on 12/07/2011 6:43:24 PM PST
by little jeremiah
(We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)

Do not, under circumstances, attempt to play the “Absolutely Nobama is not a patriot! Look he’s talking smack about a decorated war hero” card. In fact, let’s remove him from the story and look at what’s left.

“Hate. Hate. Hate. Hate.”

“Gay man”

Reading between the lines: “Look at all you bigots! How dare you speak ill of homosexuality.” (With all the leftist hissing and scratching that goes along with it.)

I love the smell of burnt paleocon in the morning....

334
posted on 12/08/2011 1:12:03 AM PST
by Absolutely Nobama
(Chairman Obama And Ron Paul Are Sure Signs The Republic Is In Serious Trouble. God Help Us All.)

Ernest Hemingway.. what to say about him.
He was actually a lunatic, and a lib.
His whole family are loons.
His writing was banal, droning, and insipid.
And he died a selfish cowardly death.
But, he knew what gunpowder tasted like for a brief second.
Now there’s a writer worth idolising!
Right?
Hemingway wrote his last book, The Old Man and the Sea, while in Cuba in the 1950’s.
That should tell you alot about him.
He’s very popular among lefties for some reason.
I guess when you have a character talking to his hand while out in a boat they love it.

Reading between the lines: Look at all you bigots! How dare you speak ill of homosexuality. (With all the leftist hissing and scratching that goes along with it.)

You and your little sewing circle can obsess over homosexuals all you want. Go right ahead; it's a free country. I just don't want any part of it. My interests are in political philosophy; chiefly, the proper relationship between the government and the governed. I merely jumped in on these threads because I find it amusing that you and your sewing circle obsess about a completely non-viable presidential candidate like Ron Paul, but eventually all threads lead to homos with you guys. So be it.

You may "love the smell of burnt paleocon in the morning . . " but I submit that's your own halitosis blowing back into your nostrils.

My very best to you and your sewing circle this Christmas season. Peace and love, and have a wonderful life. I won't mock you any more.

Sounds as though I missed nothing by not reading his books! (I’m a high school dropout so I was never forced to read them. But I was forced to read “Great Expeectations” which was a horribly depressing book.)

340
posted on 12/08/2011 10:58:43 AM PST
by little jeremiah
(We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)

My interests are in political philosophy; chiefly, the proper relationship between the government and the governed.

What does your political philosophy say about the government forcing either by law or judicial decision homosexuals in the military? Or homosexuality taught in public schools? Or legalizing "gay pride" parades? Or forcing everyone to tolerate and say nothing critical of acting out homosexuals in the public sphere?

Don't these issues fall under the aegis of "political philiosphy?

341
posted on 12/08/2011 10:59:03 AM PST
by little jeremiah
(We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)

I had a teacher who liked banal and nauseating ‘writers’.
The worse the writer, the happier the teacher was.
No, you didn’t miss anything except having to write a report on how Hemingway’s ‘work’ was significant to current events.
*puke*
Yes, our teachers loved to give us an assignment and include a pre-ordained conclusion for us.
Needless to say, since I didn’t care for the Master of Banal Writing, I got a failing grade on that assignment.
Hemingway is to good writing what Ralph Bakshi is to good animation.

Interesting.
Kurt Evans and a certain triple 7 handle were in there as well.
Kurt Evans was pushing support for homosexuals in this Conservative forum recently.
He is no longer with us in forum.
He thought he was being clever.

The United States of America was founded on a legal document between the People and their Government (both State and Federal), the Constitution. Whereas, we are a nation of LAWS, not of MEN (nor their ideals).

THIS MEANS:

— Unless the power used was expressly granted by said document, is does NOT exist.
— All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.

RE your 3 bullets:
1) Marriage is an institution of the church and God. Civil Unions != marriage, but DO == contracts (works for me), but don’t intrude one into the other.
2) I own me and my body/labor, piss off otherwise.
3) Implanted fertilized egg == new PERSON (its genetics are its own). Abortion is murder and no matter which way it goes w/ the law, I shouldn’t have to fund ‘em (see #2)

Just cause it gets your panties in a wad, doesn’t make it right nor legal. Get the gov’t and the busy-bodies the hell out of 90+% of what it’s nose is in and we can banter on the last 10% (and that goes at the local level as well. If the law(s) were made in a extortionist manor from the Fed, they should be repealed or re-voted upon).

As a Libertarian on a (sometimes hostile) Conservative site, I have yet to see ANYONE step up to the plate to ‘be the solution’, let alone BE Conservative. Talking platitudes mean sh!t if there’s no follow through, and I haven’t seen ONE department dismantled yet.

What does your political philosophy say about the government forcing either by law or judicial decision homosexuals in the military? Or homosexuality taught in public schools? Or legalizing "gay pride" parades? Or forcing everyone to tolerate and say nothing critical of acting out homosexuals in the public sphere?

The military, in my humble opinion, has two main "jobs," if you will: (1) in times of peace, to make potential enemies too intimidated to mess with us, (2) in times of war, to kill the enemy as expeditiously and efficiently in order to triumph. Again, anything, in my opinion, that prevents the military from doing those two things is a distraction.

I've never seen combat, so I do not know if there is anything inherent in combat that prevents a gay man or woman from doing his or her duty in combat. Like I've said on another thread, I know, personally, a former USN swift boat officer and graduate of USNA who performed so admirably in combat that he was awarded numerous medals for his bravery and heroism under fire. He's passed on now, but he was a gay man. Anecdotal evidence? Sure. But I cannot discount what I know to be true: He was an officer. He was a combat veteran. He was a legitimate combat hero. And he was a gay man. Honestly, man, make of it what you will, but those are the iron-clad facts.

Now, I do know something about serving in the military in peace time. I do know the importance of unit cohesion. I do know what it's like to serve in less-than-ideal conditions for long periods of time with the same group of idiots day in, day out, etc., without a break. I do know that in order to do all this effectively, efficiently, and pleasantly (as much as possible), a unit has to be able to--for lack of a better way to put it--josh around with each other, poke fun at each other, give and take barbs and insults, etc. In other words, to act like a typical Irish-American family.

And I do know that the gays, in general, tend to have a chip on their shoulder. And I do know that this chip on their shoulder often makes them the "pebble in the shoe" . . . you can't mess with them. You can't josh with them. You can't goof around with them. It only takes one person of this nature--gay or not, quite frankly--to destroy a unit's esprit de corps. I have literally seen it happen, although not with a gay guy, but with a woman (and you can draw your own conclusions there).

So there you go. That's what I "know" about gays in the military. I was only ever a JO and I never saw combat. I'll defer to the admirals and generals who have. It's their blood on the line, and the blood of the men and women beneath them. They don't shed that blood lightly.

I am flat out against sexuality being "taught" in schools. That's my job as a parent. The job of a school is to teach my kids literature, science, math, history, etc. Period. About the enforcement of "political correctness" I am dead set against it; I come from a family where ragging on each other in good fun was and is and will always be a cherished sport.

So there you go. If those stances make me a political enemy of yours, I'm sorry for it, but so be it.

“I’ve never seen combat, so I do not know if there is anything inherent in combat that prevents a gay man or woman from doing his or her duty in combat........Now, I do know something about serving in the military in peace time. I do know the importance of unit cohesion. I do know what it’s like to serve in less-than-ideal conditions for long periods of time with the same group of idiots day in, day out, etc., without a break. I do know that in order to do all this effectively, efficiently, and pleasantly (as much as possible), a unit has to be able to—for lack of a better way to put it—josh around with each other, poke fun at each other, give and take barbs and insults, etc. In other words, to act like a typical Irish-American family.

And I do know that the gays, in general, tend to have a chip on their shoulder. And I do know that this chip on their shoulder often makes them the ‘pebble in the shoe’ . . . you can’t mess with them. You can’t josh with them. You can’t goof around with them. It only takes one person of this nature—gay or not, quite frankly—to destroy a unit’s esprit de corps.”

Watching left-leaning RINO pseudo-intellectuals contradict themselves is more fun than human being should allowed to have. (H/T: El Rushbo)

349
posted on 12/09/2011 9:44:53 AM PST
by Absolutely Nobama
(Chairman Obama And Ron Paul Are Sure Signs The Republic Is In Serious Trouble. God Help Us All.)

Watching left-leaning RINO pseudo-intellectuals contradict themselves is more fun than human being should allowed to have. (H/T: El Rushbo)

Oh, brother. I'm not contradicting myself at all, just merely recounting some observations I've made out there. Heaven forbid someone try to inject a little honesty and observation into one of these threads.

Merry Christmas, Absolutely Nobama.

And Beat Army while you're at it. Here's a nice read about the Army/Navy game for you if you're interested. Some of these guys will be in harm's way in the near future on our behalf.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.